Nicholas Stuart is a columnist with the Canberra Times.
Nick Stuart has written three books,
Kevin Rudd: An Unauthorised Political Biography;
What Goes Up: Behind the 2007 Election; and
Rudd's Way: November 2007 - June 2010.

Monday, August 5, 2013

The Campaign Begins . . . Who's Winning?

After three years, the Phoney War is finally over.

So who will win the battle?

This piece for the Canberra Times outlines my thinking as the starter's gun explodes . . .

THE FUTURE, FORETOLD

It’s taken some time but we’re finally
there. The campaign’s begun. In five weeks time most of Australia will be off to
the polling booths. So who’ll win? This article’s just based on informed
analysis (speculation) but, as they say in maths, it’s important to show your
working. I think mine is pretty robust. If you disagree and think Kevin Rudd
will triumph, that’s fine. But I’d like to see your reasoning.

The first point is a huge number
of voters still haven’t made up their mind who they’ll plump for. They don’t pay
much attention to politics. Many will wake on September 7 still slightly unsure
where they’ll put a “1”. Suddenly prompted by an image or message that’s
resonated, they’ll go for one side or the other. But although they might (or
could theoretically) switch, unless something pretty significant happens over
the next five weeks it seems unlikely they will. And we’ve already got a pretty
good idea of where their votes might flow, because they’re not happy.

Start by examining the big
published polls. Since Kevin Rudd returned both Nielsen and Newspoll have shown
Labor getting 50 percent of the vote. That is, however, the high water mark.
The overall consensus shows a government struggling, unable to reach the
halfway mark. The problem is that even this won’t be enough. Rudd starts from
behind. He’ll need to win the two seats currently held by independents (and the
seat of Dobell, formerly occupied by the disgraced Craig Thompson) simply to stay
in the game.

Examine the state-by-state
breakdown and the scale of the problem is evident. Labor needs to win 52
percent of the vote in NSW before it can win three seats to replace these
losses. That appears highly unlikely. So where could the gains come from?

One seat might, possibly, change
hands in WA, but the government’s not popular in that state so it’s unlikely. Polling
in South Australia is diabolical for Labor. Although a massive swing’s needed
to put seats at risk, that’s a probability because the party’s so on the nose.
Similarly in Victoria, where Julia Gillard brought in 55 percent of the vote at
the last election. Do you really think this state will support Labor as
enthusiastically now Gillard’s gone? A very small swing will deliver another
three seats to the coalition here. All five seats in Tassie are Labor (or left-independent
in Andrew Wilkie’s case) and the Libs can confidently expect to pick up one,
probably two seats here. As we tour around the country it becomes obvious that
the government’s struggling desperately to hold on – never mind adding to the
tally.

So what about Queensland? This
state normally has the biggest swing, one way or another. Last time round it
kicked Labor hard – possibly angry because the southerners had dispatched
‘their’ PM. Now Rudd’s back and the myth is that up to ten seats are in play,
more than enough to match the losses elsewhere. The problem for Labor is that
requires a swing towards it of five percent and that’s just not on the cards.
For a start, the coalition members here will be insulated by the “sophomore
effect”. This reflects the fact that people tend to give politicians the
benefit of the doubt the first time they come up for re-election. That will be
the case for the coalition’s Queenslanders.

But the key to the result will
probably be the overall election dynamic. This will emerge before too long. Labor’s
promise of a “new way” strains credulity. It’s significant of a deeper malaise:
the party’s effectively admitting it has no record to stand on, despite spending
the last six years in government.

Don’t forget another group of
voters; those disgusted by the way Rudd’s abandoned all the policies he once
stood for. His current whirlwind of promises has involved trashing those of
2007. Reducing greenhouse gas production? Scratch that, people don’t like it.
Caring for asylum seekers? Ditto, or Labor will loose votes in Sydney’s west.
Future agenda? Talk about productivity, short on the specifics. These are
nothing more than opportunistic slogans seemingly demonstrating Rudd will say
anything to get re-elected. Some people will ask themselves how it’s possible
to give Labor any preference whatsoever. Many will vote informal.

After all, when there’s no
difference between Labor and Liberal why bother voting at all?

Evidence of accomplishment is
thin on the ground. Rudd’s central problem is the disparity between the noble
words and pure emotions they conjure up, and the reality of his record. He
seems to imagine the connection between ‘announcables’ – his spoken intentions
– and their achievement has been firmly demonstrated. It hasn’t. Rather the
opposite.

And this is the key to
understanding why an increasing percentage of Labor voters are likely to vote
informal. It will be their way of registering disgust at the lack of choice
they’re been given. Politically, Rudd’s standing so close to Tony Abbott that
it’s difficult to see the difference. When a mood begins to take hold it can
flare up like wildfire and it won’t be pretty.

A final factor needs to be
accounted for. Rudd isn’t good under pressure. He doesn’t like being put on the
spot and forced to answer questions. Remember how angry he became at the end of
his previous period as PM, when interviewers began putting him on the spot. He
quickly turns snarky. It remains to be seen if he’ll be able to cope with the pressure
when he’s not in control of the agenda. It’s obvious he’s on the way out.

But this time Australia, rather
than just his colleagues, will be dispatching him.